The Dy.Director of Income tax (Exemp.), Ahmedabad V. Sheth Jivandas Godida Shankheshwar Parshwanathji Jain Derasar Trust, Ahmedabad

ITA 1489/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6417 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 07-06-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K GUPTA
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 154; 11

Judgement Text

- 1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH C AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JM AND D.C.AGRAWAL, A M DY. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD. VS. SHETH JIVANDAS GODIDAS SHANKHESHWAR PARSHWANATHJI JAIN DERASAR TRUST, C/O SHETH MANSUKHBHAI POLE, TANKSHAL, KALUPUR, AHMEDABAD. (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI S. K. GUPTA, CIT, DR RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI, AR O R D E R PER D.C. AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE RAISING FOL LOWING GROUNDS:- (1) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DIR ECTING TO ALLOW DEDUCTION U/S 11 OF THE I.T. ACT RELYING ON T HE DECISION OF GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHANDRA CHARITABL E TRUST 294 ITR 86 WHICH HAS NOT BECOME FINAL AND SLP HAS BEEN FILED AGAINST THE SAME. FURTHER THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THAT OF CHANDRA CHARITABLE TRUST ARE NOT IDENTICAL. (2) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DIR ECTING TO ALLOW DEDUCTION U/S 11 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT ON 12, 53,31,138/- (3) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DIR ECTING TO ALLOW DEDUCTION ON RS.11,87,900/- U/S 11(1)(D) OF T HE I.T. ACT. (4) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DIR ECTING TO ALLOW DEDUCTION ON RS.1,89,78,382/- U/S 11(1)(A) OF THE I.T. ACT. ITA NO.1489/AHD/2010 ASST. YEAR 2007-08 ITA NO.1489/AHD/2010 ASST. YEAR 2007-08 2 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS A TRU ST WHICH WAS TREATED BY THE AO AS RELIGIOUS TRUST CARRYING ON ACTIVITIES OF JAIN UPASHRAYA. IT WAS HELD THAT BY THE AO THAT THE TRUST IS FOR PRIVA TE RELIGIOUS PURPOSE WHICH DOES NOT ENSURE THE BENEFIT OF PUBLIC AT LARG E AND, THEREFORE, IT IS HIT BY PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(A) & 13(1)(B) OF THE I.T. ACT. THE LD. CIT(A) INITIALLY DISMISSED THE APPEAL THROUGH A CRY PTIC ORDER DATED 16.2.2010 VIDE PARA 4 OF HIS ORDER AS UNDER :- 4. I HAVE EXAMINED THE ABOVE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASS ED BY THE LD. AO. I HAVE SEEN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. I HAVE ALSO EXAM INED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS GIVEN BY THE LD. AR SHRI N.B.DESAI ON 2 7/1/2010. HOWEVER, I AM NOT CONVINCED WITH THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS GIVEN BY THE LD. AR, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO IS APPROVED AS IT IS. 3. SUBSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSEE MOVED AN APPLICATION U /S 154 BEFORE WHOM HE PRODUCED COPIES OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2004-05 TO 2006-07 WHEREIN THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION W AS ALLOWED BY THE TRIBUNAL. THE LD. CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED THE CL AIM OF EXEMPTION TO THE TRUST IN HIS ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 154 VID E ORDER DATED 18/3/2010, PARA 3.2 AS UNDER:- 3.2 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE C ASE AND THE ABOVE APPLICATION. ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORD, IT IS NOTICE D THAT THE AO HAS WHILE REJECTING THE CLAIM U/S 11 RELIED UPON THE ASSESSME NT ORDER FOR ASST. YEAR 2004-05. THE APPELLANT HAD STATED ABOUT DECISION OF CIT(A) AND ITAT FOR ASST. YEAR 2004-05 TO 2006-07. HOWEVER, COPIES OF S UCH APPELLATE ORDERS WERE NOT PLACED BEFORE ME. HOWEVER, NOW THE APPELLA NT HAS SUBMITTED COPIES OF APPELLATE ORDERS FOR ASST. YEAR 2004-05 T O 2006-07 PASSED BY ITA NO.1489/AHD/2010 ASST. YEAR 2007-08 3 ITAT. ON PERUSAL OF ORDER OF ITAT DATED 24.10.2008 FOR ASST. YEAR 2004- 05 AND 2005-06 IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ITAT HAS HELD AS UNDER :- IN THE PRESENT CASE AT HAND, THE LD. CIT(A) IN HIS ORDER VIDE PARAGRAPH 7.6 PERTAINING TO THE ASST. YEAR 2004-05 HAS OBSERVED T HAT IN THE ASSESSEES CASE APART FROM THE RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES I.E. PROPAGATIO N OF JAIN PHILOSOPHY AND IDEOLOGY, THE TRUST IS ALSO ENGAGED IN SPREADING RE LIGIOUS AND DHARMIK KNOWLEDGE AND PROVIDING AMENITIES AND FACILITIES TO THE PILGRIMS AND RENOVATION OF JAIN TEMPLES ALL OVER INDIA. THE ACTI VITIES OF THE TRUST SHOW THAT IT IS ALSO ENGAGED IN CARRYING OUT OBJECTS OF GENER AL PUBLIC UTILITY WHICH ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE. THE LEARNED DR COULD NOT CONT ROVERT THE ABOVE OBSERVATION OF THE LD. CIT(A). THIS BEING SO, WE FI ND THAT THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF HON. SUPREME C OURT RELIED ON BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. CHANDRA CHARITABLE TRUST (2007) 294 ITR 86 (SC) IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE, AS RIGHTLY CONTENDED BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMI TY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). WE CONFIRM THE SAME AND DISMISS THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE. THE ITAT HAS WHILE DECIDING APPEAL ALSO GIVEN A FI NDING THAT APPELLANTS CASE IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE G.J. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. CHANDRA CHARITABLE TRUST 294 ITR 86 (SC). HAVIN G REGARD TO THE DECISION OF ITAT REFERRED TO ABOVE, THE FINDINGS WH ICH ARE RELIED UPON IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE PRESENT YEAR ARE REVER SED AND ACCORDINGLY FOLLOWING THE SAID ORDER OF THE ITAT THE APPELLANT WAS ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION U/S 11. I HOLD ACCORDINGLY AND MODIFY THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 16.2.2010. THE DECISION RELATING TO GROUND NO .1 IS ACCORDINGLY MODIFIED AND THE AO IS DIRECTED TO ALLOW EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIE W THERE IS NO CASE FOR INTERFERENCE IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). THE RE ASONS ARE THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WHEREIN THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION WAS ACCEPTED. SINCE THE FACT S OF THE CASE REMAINED THE SAME FOR THIS YEAR ALSO THERE IS NO REASON TO T AKE A CONTRARY VIEW THAN WHAT HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES O WN CASE IN ASST. YEAR 2004-05 & 2005-06 IN ITA NO.3235/AHD/2007 AND ITA NO.1818/AHD/2008 PRONOUNCED ON 24.10.2008 AND IN IT A ITA NO.1489/AHD/2010 ASST. YEAR 2007-08 4 NO.2137/AHD/2009 FOR ASST. YEAR 2006-07 PRONOUNCED ON 7.9.2009. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 17.06.2011. SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (D.C. AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER AHMEDABAD, DATED : 17.06.2011. MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE REVENUE. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1.DATE OF DICTATION 13/6/11. 2.DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER 15/6/11. /OTHER MEMBER. 3.DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S. 4.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT.. 5.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR .P.S./P.S 6.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 7.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8.THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSTT. REG ISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER 9.DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER..